DOI: 10.3390/nursrep16110379 ISSN: 2039-4403

Pressure Injury Prevention Knowledge in Undergraduate Nursing Students: A Cross-Sectional Study

Hugo Abad-Taboada, Alexandro Domínguez-Padilla, Alberto José Gómez-González, Borja Fernández-Herrera, Oleksandr Fedotov-Kryzhanivskiy, Álvaro Abad-Taboada, Marina Muñoz-Lupiáñez, Ada del Mar Carmona-Segovia, Marta González-García

Background/Objectives: Pressure injuries (PI) are one of the most frequent adverse events in hospitalised patients, with significant implications for quality of life and healthcare costs. While PI prevention knowledge has been studied in nursing professionals, evidence among nursing students remains limited, with only one prior study published in Spain. This study aimed to assess PI prevention knowledge and attitudes among third- and fourth-year nursing students at the University of Málaga in relation to academic and sociodemographic variables. Methods: An analytical cross-sectional design with convenience sampling was employed. Knowledge and attitudes were evaluated using the validated PIPK and APuP questionnaires. A total of 261 subjects participated (data collected December 2024–February 2025). Ethical approval: CEUMA Nº 183-2023-H. Results: Participants scored a mean of 76.03% of the maximum on the knowledge questionnaire (SD 8.29) and rated their own knowledge at 7.04 out of 10. A positive attitude toward PI prevention was found in 79.7% of them. A statistically significant positive correlation was observed between attitude and knowledge level (r = 0.175, p = 0.005). Knowledge gaps showed a statistically significant inverse relationship with knowledge level (r = −0.624, p < 0.001). Mean differences in knowledge according to sex and academic year were also significant (p = 0.044 and p = 0.004, respectively). Linear regression (R2 = 0.082) identified sex, academic year, and attitude as significant associations of PI prevention knowledge level. Conclusions: The mean knowledge score was 76.03%, and most students had a positive attitude toward prevention. Fourth-year students scored higher than third-year students. Because the study was cross-sectional, it describes this cohort at one point in time and cannot assess the effect of training.

More from our Archive